About your Search

20120925
20121003
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4
government grew during the bush and administration and during the obama administration 1.7%. i agree it is too big bet you put it in the wrong era. we both know of entrepreneurs who have been very successful but but who built the road who built the highways and it is basic six common-sense people understand people come into the state with no government at all. then don't drive on the highway. businesses need the educated work force granted, it is public-private partnership
years of the obama administration from only 1.5%. i agree that the federal government is too vague, big, but i think you are laying that in the wrong era. what i believe is that small businesses do go from entrepreneurial spirit. there is no question. we have been very successful. but even as we started telling that story, who built the roads and bridges and highways. practical people, commonsense new common sense new hampshire voters understand that we have had these states come in and they don't want any government at all. don't drive on the highways. it is the reality -- the reality is an educated workforce that is primarily from the public schools, the public university, from the technical colleges, public and private partnership. that is what i spent my career doing. bringing people together. the nonprofit communities and to give sense that it's necessary to have legislation, often it is not. the two projects that i like to work on are the medication bridge program in the college savings program. neither of those required any government expenditures. not a single tax dollar. and it
there are a lot of folks that believe gosh, we need more rigorous immigration enforcement. that's why the obama administration embraced the. it's about how all these things represent and what are you obligate to say when you're pinned down. do you believe in enforcing these laws, or not? the thing is when you say, the whole idea of the dream act is that well, these are the good kids. let's attack the interest of the good kids. advocates will say, i think there are, it doesn't mean you're a bad kid if you're in community college or it may be got in trouble if you're a teenager and your criminal record, it doesn't make you a bad person and i think there's something very disingenuous about the debate. that's of course advocates want to structure the debate in a certain way. i don't know how much of this is rooted in any kind of beliefs prior to the way that we actually structure the conversation. i do think that advocates have structured the conversation very advantageously which is their job. >> thank you. >> just a couple more questions and then we'll have to cut it off. so maybe back there. and
than the senate or the obama administration making its proceedings more transparent to the public online. that is according to participants of a semi-foundation for an in washington d.c. the group also discussed the fact that lawmakers not only read the legislation of full before voting on it. this is 90 minutes. >> welcome. my name is daniel schuman, director of the advising committee and transparency. today's discussion is going to focus on whether congress is serious about transparency. we are going to beat the one 112 congress and also identify some of the deficits. we are going to do my speaking portion very quickly because it's really interesting is of course a panelist on to say. to mr. for introducing them. on my right is hugh halpern, staff director for the u.s. house of representatives committee and rules. on the committee is served us chief advisor. immediately to my left is jim harper, director of policy studies at the cato institute and also the founder of washington watch.com, which keeps a close eye on legislation and federal funding. jenna sasser to mention washing
Search Results 0 to 3 of about 4

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)